Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36408762›Full record

ArticleBiometrics2023

Discussion on: Instrumented difference-in-differences, by Ting Ye, Ashkan Ertefaie, James Flory, Sean Hennessy and Dylan S. Small.

Karla DiazOrdaz

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biometrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Karla DiazOrdazDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3155-1561

Funding

Wellcome Trust 218554/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

I discuss the assumptions needed for identification of average treatment effects and local average treatment effects in instrumented difference-in-differences (IDID), and the possible trade-offs between assumptions of standard IV and those needed for the new proposal IDID, in one- and two-sample settings. I also discuss the interpretation of the estimands identified under monotonicity. I conclude by suggesting possible extensions to the estimation method, by outlining a strategy to use data-adaptive estimation of the nuisance parameters, based on recent developments.

Indexed as

causal inferencecausal machine learningdifference in differenceinstrumental variables

Identifiers

PMID36408762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.